Bug#901193: Bug#901003: There is no standard way of removing transitional / dummy packages
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 12:17:41AM +0000, Justin B Rye wrote:
> Vincent.Mcintyre@csiro.au wrote:
> >> + <para>
> >> + The package descriptions for transitional dummy packages usually indicate their
> >> + purpose. However, they are not uniform; in particular, some <quote>dummy</quote>
> >> + packages are designed to be kept installed (e.g. to express a dependency on
> >> + the current latest version of some program). You might also find
> >> + <command>deborphan</command> with the
> >> <literal>--guess-<replaceable>*</replaceable></literal> options (e.g.
> >> - <literal>--guess-dummy</literal>) useful to detect them in your system. Note
> >> - that some dummy packages are not intended to be removed after an upgrade but
> >> - are, instead, used to keep track of the current available version of a program
> >> - over time.
> >> + <literal>--guess-dummy</literal>) useful to detect transitional dummy packages
> >> + on your system.
> >> </para>
> >> </section>
> >>
> >
> > I agree with everything you've said about this text but as regards
> > the patch I think some mention of tracking packages should be kept.
> > Something like:
> >
> > One class of dummy package that are not intended to be removed
> > are <quote>tracking</quote> packages, which are used to keep
> > track of the current available version of a program over time.
> > A common case is <literal>linux-image-</literal>-&architecture;.
>
> The idea was that the earlier bit about "a dependency on the current
> latest version of some program" was talking about "tracking packages",
> and it seemed to make more sense to mention them in the part before
> the deborphan recipe.
>
Ah, with you now. sorry for the noise.
> Unlike Ben I rather like the idea of distinguishing version-tracking
> dependency metapackages from full-suite dependency metapackages, but
> we don't want to go into it in depth here. The objective is just to
> tell readers enough to let them ignore both kinds while searching for
> transitional dummy packages.
>
> I was deliberately not using linux-image-* as an example on the
> grounds that it doesn't claim to be a "dummy package". In fact most
> of the confusing cases seem to be "full-suite" metapackages.
>
> So another option would be:
>
> The package descriptions for transitional dummy packages usually indicate their
> purpose. However, they are not uniform; in particular, some <quote>dummy</quote>
> packages are designed to be kept installed, in order to pull in a full software
> suite, or track the current latest version of some program. You might also find
> <command>deborphan</command> with the
> <literal>--guess-<replaceable>*</replaceable></literal> options (e.g.
> <literal>--guess-dummy</literal>) useful to detect transitional dummy packages
> on your system.
>
Works for me.
Vince
Reply to: